Was this election a set-up?

In another thread bemoaning the poor choice of presidential candidates this time, it was mentioned by someone else that it looks like a set-up.

I am curious as to how Democrats feel about the Democratic nominee for President this time? I personally feel that there were better choices than Kerry and am wondering how the heck it was decided that he was "the one" this time.

It also seems in retrospect that Kerry made several gaffes and missed a lot of opportunities during the campaign. It is almost like he was trying to screw up (and indeed he may have been doing just that if his handlers told him to).

I guess I am wondering: Did Kerry try to throw the election? Was his nomination on purpose because almost any other prominant Dem would have beaten Bush in a landslide? Or is it a case of "anyone but Bush looks good to us so we just weren't thinking"?

Do I smell a conspiracy here, or just a case of people not using their brains?

Inquiring minds wanna know...I'm still trying to puzzle out how the heck we got stuck with Bush/Kerry and want someone to rail against

Maybe some of you good people can clue me in, because I am still perplexed and confused by all of this and how we got here.


Gardenia

Clinton did it!!!
hahaha

Sorry I had to beat them to it!!

Kerry was to creepy and people didn't trust him.
I would say he got 30% of his votes from Bush haters

Originally posted by Vladtepes

I would say he got 30% of his votes from Bush haters

Very true...but Kerry as a set up?....You guys voted for him in the primarys...you could have made a different choice...dont try and make this a conspiracy theory cause he lost....

Originally posted by Vladtepes
Kerry was to creepy and people didn't trust him.

yeah..something about his *nose*


[edit on 3-11-2004 by aryaputhra]

Huh? Did Kerry try and throw it? Funny, I thought Bush was really trying to quit his job by getting fired! He didn't fight the fight as I thought he should have!
Honestly, I thought kerry was going to win due to apathy on the part of Dubya!

I just can't believe Florida voted for Bush after what has happened 4 years ago.
Governmental aid after annual hurricanes can't matter this much, now can it ???

Yes, I smell rat...

And Rupert Murdoch...

SHAME ON YOU!

[edit on 3-11-2004 by Olafski]

I dont know whats more sad, a set-up or people actually buying the crap Bush stands for?

Originally posted by Olafski
I just can't believe Florida voted for Bush after what has happened 4 years ago.

[edit on 3-11-2004 by Olafski]

Once again...the democrats did 3 recounts of their own in 2000...all with Bush coming out the winner...Gore wanted to throw out the oversea's votes...because most were for Bush...and yea...that CHAD system the demo's moaned so much about...IT WAS IMPLEMENTED BY A DEMOCRAT...so once again...what happened in florida?

Nah... No conspiracy. Those of us who were pro-Kerry are going to have to simply admit that it was in all likelihood, a squeeker, and get on with getting on.

I wish the "too close to call" States would make a difference, but probably not.



[edit on 3-11-2004 by sigung86]
edited to add the last sentence and little frownie face.

[edit on 3-11-2004 by sigung86]

I think we, as a country, really ARE that stupid. Especially when you consider the demographic differences of the 'Red' vs 'Blue' states. I think people are incapable of forward thinking. One of the biggest disappointments is that the 20-something generation had a truly unique opportunity to change the course of history and, as usual, they stayed home to play X-Box. Well, when they're being loaded on the bus to head for any one of several possible armed conflicts they can kiss my a$$. They had their chance and they blew it.


[edit on 3-11-2004 by jtma508]

i can't believe this crap has started already. not even all the votes are counted. i am hoping Bush comes out on top, for a very small (in the whole scheme of things) issue, but he still has a chance to lose this election. don't get so down, Kerry people, and please, calm down with the conspiracy crap, it gets old. the elction isn't over, til it's over.

I love it! I didn't see this coming...Kerry loses and now it's because he was supposed to lose?!?!? I didn't vote for either, so I knew this I would be dissapointed no matter what, but this is priceless!

So, 3 years later, I find this thread.

I believe that it was a set up from the beginning. Kerry was hand-picked by to lose to Bush. It's no conincidence that they're both Skull and Bones.

The Democratic and Republican leaderships may as well be the same. There's no difference between the parties anymore. Even after the mid-term elections, when the Dems won on an anti-war ticket, they all folded to Bush on the issue. How can anyone read the news and NOT think that American politics are a complete sham?

I was a bit active in 2004, this is what I saw. Kerry did not throw the election, he was sold down the river by Clinton campaign staff they did not want him to win. They set him up with bad advice and he was not smart enough to get out from under it till it was to late. He did a few things to show he did want to win, he just did not want to win enough to be a patriot and defend the constitution.

Sure Bush stole the election, but Kerry could have done much better. He also did not have the gonads to fight in the end, he rolled over to keep his cushy Senate seat.

He said he was not going to persue winning and conceeded because it would be a scorched earth campaign. This is a direct quote. If he fought for the win in 2004 after election the only way the Repubs would have left office is by literal military force.

If push would have come to shove the military would have sided with Kerry, The top brass all hated Rummy, and the democrats had Wesly Clark who was highly respected. He was also retired so he was not restrained by not being able to speak or act.

If Kerry was a strong leader, and the democrats/people took the media early they could have "won" the election/civil war.

Middle America may be Republican but the also are not very well informed many would flip if things got serious. It would have been very ugly, and I do not know how well the NWO would have played their hand at the time, but it was doable.

Democrats had majority control of NE corodor and west coast, even if it took a few months for the red strong holds to settle down blues would have had it. the reds need the blue states.

Clinton was picked to win in 2008 before 2004 was even over. She must be defeated.

Their was a short attempt in congress, a mini attempt to revolt but the republican whips got their defectors back in line, and Kerry did not stand up and lead.

reply to post by Redge777

Sure Bush stole the election

How exactly?

reply to post by ferretman2


I just don't have the strength to get into it. I will say this.

Diebold
Ohio precincts with 5 hour lines in democratic areas.
Ohio voters still waiting to vote at 1:00 pm
Precincts locking out media and doing suspicious things with votes.


If your responce is prove it I ask you to prove to me that Hitler was the leader of Germany in WW2. Prove to me that the library in portland oregon has a copy of war and peace at this very moment. Or how about this prove to me that he was elected. It is a matter of credibility and an election that was never challenged when their was plenty of smoke.

I could do the digging and present the evidence, but you would not accept it because you do not want to believe it. There are books written on it. And Diebold alone is enough said.

Just because you say someone can not prove something to your standard does not mean it is not right, and you know that. I would bet you even suspect he lost and just know that you can support the election results and spin off any comments.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by Redge777]

reply to post by ferretman2


www.abovetopsecret.com...


I'm amazed that this thread is almost 4 years old, it's applicable today. I don't believe Clinton will win.

Poll numbers tell the story. You have more support for Bush than you do for Congress - meaning: Democrats are more willing to turn on their leaders while Republicans are willing to blindly follow their leader to whatever end.

If you have an agenda of unpopular ideas, you need a base of support. Republicans are such a base.

It's interesting though, if Clinton is elected, the potential exists for the first ever husband/wife impeachments. There are a number of scenarios which are still feasible that could result in Clinton's winning... For now, my money is on a Republican victory.